You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Wrighty Wrexham
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 17 Mar 2009
- Messages
- 5,239
Negative manager tbh!!
Failsworth_Blue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 24 Jul 2008
- Messages
- 4,188
I think it was more to do with the Sunderland keeper having the game of his life in the second half rather than the players or the manager being negative. Not many teams will go to Sunderland and create as many as chances as we did yesterday, it's a tough place to go and win as they've shown this season and we were exellent in the second half and created numerous chances only to find a keeper who was in top form
Until RSC came on in the first half we were poor as we had no focal point in attack and as soon as Bellamy or Tevez got the ball the Sunderland defenders were pressing them, when RSC came on it gave us another option and something for the Sunderland defenders to keep an eye on
I don't think Mancini or the players are negative and a point away at Sunderland is a decent enough result
Until RSC came on in the first half we were poor as we had no focal point in attack and as soon as Bellamy or Tevez got the ball the Sunderland defenders were pressing them, when RSC came on it gave us another option and something for the Sunderland defenders to keep an eye on
I don't think Mancini or the players are negative and a point away at Sunderland is a decent enough result
Neil McNab
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 7 May 2009
- Messages
- 3,371
NDJ was the worst player on the pitch, gave the ball away nearly everytime he passed the ball, most negative player I've ever seen.
D
D
Deleted member 14625
Guest
It's difficult when the only attacking midfielder at the club has been garbage, not only that but his work rate and effort had dropped also! You'd think when a player us out of form they'd at least up their intensity to work at getting that form back or at make up for the lack of class.
This isn't a dig at Ireland! Maybe an unfortunate situation for City to be in as the other attacking midfielder we had (Elano) was a cun.t (we are better off without him by the way - even Vincent Kompany said as much when he recently came to our supporters club meeting when asked if there was dressing room unrest at City VK said "them players are not with City anymore!", without naming names, but someone asked "you mean Elano?" and VK laughed, half nodded and said "ha, well i wouldn't like to say"!)
and we don't have anyone else in that position. Hughes never replaced Elano after selling him, and maybe Mancini really thought we could get Mariga and that he'd be the man there for us but it never came off! But never mind there's nowt we or anyone else can do about it now is there? and Mancini can only play what we have, if it is going to gain us a point away (rather than 0) and 3 at home (rather than 1) to leave Ireland on the bench, then so be it!
This isn't a dig at Ireland! Maybe an unfortunate situation for City to be in as the other attacking midfielder we had (Elano) was a cun.t (we are better off without him by the way - even Vincent Kompany said as much when he recently came to our supporters club meeting when asked if there was dressing room unrest at City VK said "them players are not with City anymore!", without naming names, but someone asked "you mean Elano?" and VK laughed, half nodded and said "ha, well i wouldn't like to say"!)
and we don't have anyone else in that position. Hughes never replaced Elano after selling him, and maybe Mancini really thought we could get Mariga and that he'd be the man there for us but it never came off! But never mind there's nowt we or anyone else can do about it now is there? and Mancini can only play what we have, if it is going to gain us a point away (rather than 0) and 3 at home (rather than 1) to leave Ireland on the bench, then so be it!
Failsworth_Blue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 24 Jul 2008
- Messages
- 4,188
Neil McNab said:NDJ was the worst player on the pitch, gave the ball away nearly everytime he passed the ball, most negative player I've ever seen.
33 passes with 5 unsuccessful
A
A
Anonymous
Guest
Oh well - as I said earlier, it seems that giving teams a goal's head start, and the first 45 minutes to impose themselves upon us, is perfectly acceptable.
You can't argue with the poster earlier who said a midfield combination of Barry, De Jong, Viera, or Zabaleta, with SWP and Bellamy isn't going to create much.
Again I asked earlier in the thread but everyone has simply ignored it - why was it necessary to play ball winning midfield players against Sunderland's midfield power houses (!) Meyler and Richardson. They had their two best midfield players (Cana and Cattermole) out, and were weak in the middle of the park. So what do we do, we proceed to hoof it long over them onto RSC's head over and over again.
Personally, having slept on it, I think Mancini fucked up yesterday. I'm not at all convinced by that performance or team selection...just my opinion mind. Before the tub thumpers come piling in, no I don't want him sacked, no I don't think he's a shit manager, yes I will get behind the team on match days, and no I don't want Hughes back. Cheers. Billy Shears.
You can't argue with the poster earlier who said a midfield combination of Barry, De Jong, Viera, or Zabaleta, with SWP and Bellamy isn't going to create much.
Again I asked earlier in the thread but everyone has simply ignored it - why was it necessary to play ball winning midfield players against Sunderland's midfield power houses (!) Meyler and Richardson. They had their two best midfield players (Cana and Cattermole) out, and were weak in the middle of the park. So what do we do, we proceed to hoof it long over them onto RSC's head over and over again.
Personally, having slept on it, I think Mancini fucked up yesterday. I'm not at all convinced by that performance or team selection...just my opinion mind. Before the tub thumpers come piling in, no I don't want him sacked, no I don't think he's a shit manager, yes I will get behind the team on match days, and no I don't want Hughes back. Cheers. Billy Shears.
I don't think anyone thinks it's acceptable to go one down or to continually play the first half the way we did.
But I don't think a change in formation would have made us pass better, or make less dumb mistakes, or stop individuals from playing poorly. A more attacking formation wouldn't have guaranteed we wouldn't have gone in 1 or more down at half time, in fact the way individuals were performing I would have thought conceding one or more would have been most likely with a less defensive formation.
Where he fucked up on the day IMO, is taking too long to replace SWP.
But I don't think a change in formation would have made us pass better, or make less dumb mistakes, or stop individuals from playing poorly. A more attacking formation wouldn't have guaranteed we wouldn't have gone in 1 or more down at half time, in fact the way individuals were performing I would have thought conceding one or more would have been most likely with a less defensive formation.
Where he fucked up on the day IMO, is taking too long to replace SWP.
flb
Well-Known Member
moomba said:I don't think anyone thinks it's acceptable to go one down or to continually play the first half the way we did.
But I don't think a change in formation would have made us pass better, or make less dumb mistakes, or stop individuals from playing poorly. A more attacking formation wouldn't have guaranteed we wouldn't have gone in 1 or more down at half time, in fact the way individuals were performing I would have thought conceding one or more would have been most likely with a less defensive formation.
Where he fucked up on the day IMO, is taking too long to replace SWP.
should have been replaced before half time
I do find it amazing how short memories some fans have.
Mancini started at City with a 442. Something the board had been (wrongly IMO) crying out for ever since the Sven days. Wasn't working, so he went to 451 against Stoke and it worked. Fans applauded him. Stayed 451 for the game at Wolves, wasnt working. Switched to 442 and it worked.
Cue the 442 for a number of weeks where we also steam rolled Blackburn, only to fall short badly against Everton, where Fellaini murdered us. 442 doesnt work you cried... its obvious we have to go back to 451/433. Such was the manner of the defeat, Mancini didn't feel he could trust Barry and De Jong against United, so switched to 451 with 3 "defensive" midfielders. And guess what, we won that night, so he stuck with it at Old Trafford where we narrowly lost and had more than enough chances to at least take the tie to extra time.
The United game had a huge effect on morale, and we were down in the dumps for a good month following that. You asked for Ireland, he gave you Ireland... who flopped against Stoke. The morale stayed low until the Chelsea game, where we played... 451 with three defensive midfielders. AJ looked poor there, and SWP played well enough to retain his spot so it was as you were against Sunderland. So please stop with the revisionist shit about 1) fielding too negative a side when the facts show that we've got more results playing this way under Mancini and 2) SWP shouldn't have started over AJ.
The truth is Mancini doesn't have the personnel to play how he likes, so it's a weekly struggle to find his best team on any given week. This is confounded by the fact we do not have enough quality in central midfield. He wanted Mariga and Vieira for a reason, as he recognised rightly that the midfield is our weakest position by a country mile. We have no options there - if Barry isn't playing well there is nobody to replace him. If Ireland isn't playing well there isn't anybody to replace him in that position. United have Carrick, Anderson, Scholes, Fletcher, Gibson, Hargreaves... if one of them isn't playing well, as Carrick wasn't earlier in the season he loses his place. If one of them is injured, like Hargreaves, there is quality to replace him. Same at Chelsea with Lampard, Essien, Mikel, Cole, Ballack all capable of playing in the middle. We don't have that luxury and it's killed us this year.
Mancini started at City with a 442. Something the board had been (wrongly IMO) crying out for ever since the Sven days. Wasn't working, so he went to 451 against Stoke and it worked. Fans applauded him. Stayed 451 for the game at Wolves, wasnt working. Switched to 442 and it worked.
Cue the 442 for a number of weeks where we also steam rolled Blackburn, only to fall short badly against Everton, where Fellaini murdered us. 442 doesnt work you cried... its obvious we have to go back to 451/433. Such was the manner of the defeat, Mancini didn't feel he could trust Barry and De Jong against United, so switched to 451 with 3 "defensive" midfielders. And guess what, we won that night, so he stuck with it at Old Trafford where we narrowly lost and had more than enough chances to at least take the tie to extra time.
The United game had a huge effect on morale, and we were down in the dumps for a good month following that. You asked for Ireland, he gave you Ireland... who flopped against Stoke. The morale stayed low until the Chelsea game, where we played... 451 with three defensive midfielders. AJ looked poor there, and SWP played well enough to retain his spot so it was as you were against Sunderland. So please stop with the revisionist shit about 1) fielding too negative a side when the facts show that we've got more results playing this way under Mancini and 2) SWP shouldn't have started over AJ.
The truth is Mancini doesn't have the personnel to play how he likes, so it's a weekly struggle to find his best team on any given week. This is confounded by the fact we do not have enough quality in central midfield. He wanted Mariga and Vieira for a reason, as he recognised rightly that the midfield is our weakest position by a country mile. We have no options there - if Barry isn't playing well there is nobody to replace him. If Ireland isn't playing well there isn't anybody to replace him in that position. United have Carrick, Anderson, Scholes, Fletcher, Gibson, Hargreaves... if one of them isn't playing well, as Carrick wasn't earlier in the season he loses his place. If one of them is injured, like Hargreaves, there is quality to replace him. Same at Chelsea with Lampard, Essien, Mikel, Cole, Ballack all capable of playing in the middle. We don't have that luxury and it's killed us this year.